The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2001-Oct> msg00272



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

<draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-lsp-tunnel>

  • From: francis.arts@alcatel.be
  • Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 20:34:37 +0200
  • Cc: brockmas@se.bel.alcatel.be
  • X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BEMAIL06/BE/ALCATEL(Release 5.0.8 |June 18, 2001) at10/17/2001 20:34:39,Serialize complete at 10/17/2001 20:34:39


Hello,

I have 2 questions on <draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-lsp-tunnel>. Consider the following LSP:

       Node1 ====> Node2 ======> Node3 =====> Node4 ======> Egress


Consider 2 situations:


1) Assume that the operator modifies the IP@ of node **2** on the link [node 2 - node 3]. Is it then
* needed to break down the LSP
or
* is it allowed that the LSP is kept up but that node 2 sends a PATH message with the modified RSVH_HOP object?
[The latter would also imply that node 3 would start sending to node 2 RESV refresh messages with the new IP@ of node 2 as the IP destination address.]


2) Assume that the operator modifies the IP@ of node **3** on the link [node 2 - node 3]. Is it then
* needed to break down the LSP
or
* is it allowed that the LSP is kept up but that node **3** sends a RESV message to node 2 with the modified RSVH_HOP object?


Best regards,

        Francis.